Jiddu Krishnamurti on Yoga and Yogic exercises

Question: Are yogic exercises helpful in any way to human beings?

Jiddu Krishnamurti: I think one must go into this question fairly deeply. Apparently in Europe, as well as in India, there is this idea that by doing yogic exercises, practising virtue, being good, participating in social work, reading sacred books, following a teacher – that by doing something of this kind, you are going to achieve salvation or enlightenment. I am afraid you are not. On the contrary, you are going to be caught in the things you are practising, and therefore you will always be held a prisoner and your vision will be everlastingly limited.

Yogic exercises are all right, probably, for the body. Any kind of exercise – walking, jumping, climbing mountains, swimming, or whatever you do – is on the same level. But to suppose that certain exercises will lead you to salvation, to understanding, to God, truth, wisdom – this I think is sheer nonsense, even though all the yogis in India say otherwise. If once you see that anything that you practise, that you accept, that you develop, always has behind it the element of greed – wanting to get something, wanting to reach something, wanting to break a record – , then you will leave it alone. A mind that is merely concerned with the `how’, with doing yogic exercises, this or that, will only develop a sense of achievement through time, and such a mind can never comprehend that which is timeless.

After all, you practise yogic exercises in the hope of reaching something, gaining something; you hope to achieve happiness, bliss, or whatever is offered. Do you think bliss is so easily realized? Do you think it is something to be gained by doing certain exercises, or developing concentration? Must not the mind be altogether free of this self-centred activity? Surely a man who practises yoga in order to reach enlightenment, is concerned about himself, about his own growth; he is full of his own importance. So it is a tremendous art – an art which can be approached only through self-knowledge, not through any practice – to understand this whole process of self-centred activity in the name of God, in the name of truth, in the name of peace, or whatever it be – to understand and be free of it.

Now, to be free does not demand time, and I think this is our difficulty. We say “I am envious, and to get rid of envy I must control, I must suppress, I must sacrifice, I must do penance, I must practise yoga”, and all the rest of it – all of which indicates the continuance of self-centred activity, only transferred to a different level. If one sees this, if one really understands it, then one no longer thinks in terms of getting rid of envy in a certain period of time. Then the problem is, can one get rid of envy immediately? It is like a hungry man – he does not want a promise of food tomorrow, he wants to be fed now, and in that sense he is free of time. But we are indolent, and what we want is a method to lead us to something which will ultimately give us pleasure.

Hamburg, Germany 4th Public Talk 14th September 1956

Kashmir Shaivism, Tantra and Advaita Vedanta – Ramana Maharshi’s view

ramana-maharshi face
Sri Ramana Maharshi

Kashmir Shaivism is a non-dual tantric tradition in which Pratyabhijna or ‘recognition’ is the goal. In Kashmir Shaivism, the absolute is termed ‘Shiva’ and the relative world of people and objects is termed ‘Shakti’ (which means energy or power). Shiva and Shakti are given equal status and are said not to exist apart from each other – where one exists, the other also exists.

In Non-Dual (Advaita) Vedanta, the Self (Atman) is the Absolute (Brahman) and it is said to project Maya-Shakti which in turn projects the world of people and objects. Maya is said to be dependent on the Absolute Self and not vice-versa, so the two are not given equal status.

This obviously causes confusion in some seekers, so here Ramana explains them both:

The following is an excerpt from Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Talk 288:

Explaining Maya of Vedanta and swatantra [tantra] of Pratyabhijna (independence of recognition), Sri Bhagavan said:

The Vedantins say that Maya is the sakti of illusion premised in Siva. Maya has no independent existence. Having brought out the illusion of the world as real, she continues to play upon the ignorance of the victims. When the reality of her not being is found, she disappears.

‘Recognition’ [ie. Kashmir Shaivism] says that Sakti (power) is coeval with Siva. The one does not exist without the other. Siva is unmanifest, whereas Sakti is manifest on account of Her independent will swatantra. Her manifestation is the display of the cosmos on pure consciousness, like images in a mirror.

The images cannot remain in the absence of a mirror.

So also the world cannot have an independent existence. Swatantra becomes eventually an attribute of the Supreme. Sri Sankara says that the Absolute is without attributes and that Maya is not and has no real being. What is the difference between the two? Both agree that the display is not real. The images of the mirror cannot in any way be real. The world does not exist in reality (vastutah).

Both schools mean the same thing. Their ultimate aim is to realise the Absolute Consciousness. The unreality of the cosmos is implied in Recognition (Pratyabhijna), whereas it is explicit in Vedanta. If the world be taken as chit (consciousness), it is always real. Vedanta says that there is no nana (diversity), meaning that it is all the same Reality.

There is agreement on all points except in words and the method of expression.

Tom: note that in both Advaita Vedanta and Kashmir Shaivism, the essential teaching is the same – ie. one is advised to turn within, that is turn away from objects, and realise the Pure Consciousness, the Self Within, devoid of objects. Only the conceptual framework and superficial aspects of the teachings vary.

The Supreme Source 3: Dzogchen ‘instructions’

Instructions from the Supreme Source


‘Listen! As all self-liberates there is no need to correct the body posture or to visualise a deity. There is no need to correct the voice or speech. There is no need to correct the mind through meditation. By correcting oneself, it is not possible to find the authentic condition, and without finding the authentic condition, one cannot self-liberate’

Chapter 29, p. 166

The Supreme Source 2: Dzogchen teachings


In my previous post I introduced this book which contains arguably the most important text in Dzogchen, the Kunjed Gyalpo, with Dzogchen itself considered by many to be the height of Buddhist teachings. If true, this would mean that this text is the ‘creme-de-la-creme’ of spiritual instruction.

For me the text is sublime and poignant and complete. Whilst I think many other teachings are just as ‘high’, reading it makes my heart open and sing, and I offer you some extracts, with my thoughts interspersed with the aim of highlighting important aspects of Dzogchen teachings.

Continue reading

The Supreme Source 1: Our True Nature


‘The aim of Dzogchen is the reawakening of the individual to the primordial state of enlightenment which is naturally found in all beings’

Thus states the first line on the back-cover of this treasure-trove of a book. This book is a comprehensive book on Dzogchen, which some say is the highest teaching of Tibetan Buddhism, and is based upon the translation of one of the most ancient and perhaps most important Dzogchen texts, the Kunjed Gyalpo.

Continue reading